NIPC Law

Jane Lambert Patents Court (HH Judge Hacon) Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH and others v Aspire Pharma Ltd and others [2024] EWHC 711 (Pat) (27 March 2024) Rivaroxaban  is an anticoagulant medication used to treat and prevent blood clots, particularly deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary emboli and atrial fibrillation after hip or knee surgery.  Until the hearing of this application Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH, its holding and associated companies enjoyed a monopoly of the market for rivaroxaban in the UK, That was because Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH held a patent for the product as a compound which was extended until 1 April 2024 by a supplementary protection certificate. Aspire Pharma Ltd.  was one of several pharmaceutical companies that hoped to supply generic rivaroxaban upon the expiry of the SPC.  However, Bayer Intellectual Property GmbH also held European patent number 1 845 961 B1 for the treatment of thromboembolic disorders with rivaroxa...

Jane Lambert   Patents Court (Mr Justice Macaroli) Dr Reddy's Laboratories (UK) Ltd and others v Warner Lambert LLC and another [2021] EWHC 2182 (Ch) (30 July 2021) Each of the 35 claimants in these proceedings had been awarded an inquiry as to damages either for losses sustained as a result of an interim injunction that the defendants had agreed to pay or for losses resulting from threats of litigation that the court had held to be groundless.  Most of the claimants were pharmaceutical companies that supplied pregabalin  which they were allowed to distribute for the treatment of epilepsy and anxiety but not neuropathic pain.  The remaining claimants were the governments of the United Kingdom, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and the National Health Service that wished to treat patients for neuropathic pain with generic products. The Dispute Warner Lambert Company LLC was the proprietor of  EP0641330 B1  for isobutylgaba, of which pregabalin is a deriv...

Supreme Court Author Christine Smith Licence Creative Commons attribution share alike 4.0 international Source Wikipedia Jane Lambert Supreme Court (Lords Mance, Kerr, Sumption, Mance and Hodge)  Cartier International AG and others v British Telecommunications Plc and another   [2018] 1 WLR 3259, [2018] WLR 3259, [2018] WLR (D) 354, [2018] UKSC 28 What this Appeal was about In  Cartier International AG and others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and others   : [2015] EMLR 10, [2015] 1 All ER 949, [2015] 1 All ER (Comm) 641, [2015] RPC 175, [2014] EWHC 3354 (Ch), [2015] BUS LR 298, [2015] RPC 7, [2015] Bus LR 298, [2015] ETMR 1, [2014] WLR(D) 464 Mr Justice Arnold made an order requiring British Sky Broadcasting Ltd. and other internet service providers ("ISPs") to block access to certain websites which promoted the sale of counterfeit products under s.37 (1)  of the Senior Courts Act 1981. I blogged about the case in...

Cartier Watch Author Noop1958 Creative Commons Licence Source Wikipedia Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others [2016] EWCA Civ 658 (6 July 2016)  In   Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others   [2015] ETMR 1, [2015] 1 All ER 949, [2014] EWHC 3354 (Ch), [2015] RPC 7, [2014] WLR(D) 464, [2015] 1 All ER (Comm) 641, [2015] BUS LR 298, [2015] EMLR 10 Mr Justice Arnold ordered the five leading internet service providers to block access to certain websites that offered counterfeit Cartier goods for sale under s.37 (1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981. I discussed the case in  Injunctions against ISPs Part VIII: Cartier International AG and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others   6 Jan 2015. This was not the first time a court had ordered an ISP to block access to a website that infringed a claimant's intellectual property rights.  A number of ea...

Jane Lambert Whenever a court grants an interim injunction, or a respondent offers an undertaking, to do or refrain from doing something that might infringe a right claimed by the applicant, the applicant has to offer the respondent and in the most cases the court "a cross undertaking as to damages." Wording that is recommended for freezing injunctions but which could be adapted for other orders mutatis mutandis  runs as follows: "If the court later finds that this order has caused loss to the Respondent, and decides that the Respondent should be compensated for that loss, the Applicant will comply with any order the court may make." The need for such a cross-undertaking was considered by the House of Lords in the landmark case of American Cyanamid Co (No 1) v Ethicon Ltd [1977] FSR 593, [1975] AC 396, [1975] 1 All ER 504, [1975] 2 WLR 316, [1975] UKHL 1. An interim injunction is intended to be a temporary remedy to prevent a  fait accompli w...

In  Warner -Lambert Company, LLC v Actavis Group Plc EHF and Others   [2015] EWHC 72 (Pat) (21 Jan 2015) Warner-Lambert LLC applied to Mr Justice Arnold for an interim injunction in the following terms: "1, The Defendants:  (a) shall make it a condition of any oral or written agreement entered into with a pharmacy for the supply of Lecaent that the pharmacy shall use reasonable endeavours not to supply or dispense Lecaent to patients who have been prescribed pregabalin for the treatment of pain, by making reasonable enquiries of a person presenting a prescription for 'pregabalin' as to whether the prescription is for pain and/or making reasonable checks of pharmacy records for the same; and  (b) shall make it a condition of any oral or written agreement entered into with an intermediary (such as a distributor) for the supply of Lecaent that, in any onward supply of Lecaent by the intermediary, such intermediary must in turn make it a condition ...

It is perhaps eccentric if not downright ungrateful to promote a different business model for the music and motion picture industries having rebuilt my practice on advising and representing defendants to copyright infringement claims by trade associations in those industries but a flower is a great deal cheaper than an intellectual property lawyer and not necessarily less effective.  Before considering Mr.Justice Arnold's judgment in  EMI Records Ltd and Others v British Sky Broadcasting Ltd and Others     [2013] EWHC 379 (Ch), [2013] WLR(D) 86 it is perhaps worth watching Amanda Palmer's video on The Art of Asking and pondering her message which I have reproduced from the TED website : "Don't make people pay for music, says Amanda Palmer: Let them. In a passionate talk that begins in her days as a street performer (drop a dollar in the hat for the Eight-Foot Bride!), she examines the new relationship between artist and fan. Alt-rock icon Amanda Fucking Palmer...